Homework Help

Which came first, The Chicken or The Egg?I've just seen this question mentioned on...

user profile pic

desdamona | eNotes Newbie

Posted November 28, 2008 at 3:49 AM via web

dislike 5 like
Which came first, The Chicken or The Egg?

I've just seen this question mentioned on another thread and it seems there may be an answer! Is there an answer to this weird problem?

17 Answers | Add Yours

user profile pic

frizzyperm | College Teacher | Valedictorian

Posted November 28, 2008 at 7:49 AM (Answer #2)

dislike 0 like

Easy Peasy... The Egg beat The Chicken by millions of years!

The answer comes from the fossil record.

A Chicken is a bird and the fossil record indicates that birds evolved from during the Jurassic period, around 150–200 million years ago, towards the end of the dinosaur's reign.

Whereas the earliest hard-shelled eggs were laid by reptiles in the carboniferous around 300 million years ago. 

So eggs came first, by approximately 150 millions years!

And you can win a fun argument at Christmas Dinner this year with this good use of evolutionary science!

user profile pic

isaxgrl | High School Teacher | eNoter

Posted November 28, 2008 at 11:41 AM (Answer #3)

dislike 0 like

Well--previous post only works if 1--you accept the lie of macro- evolution, and 2-you deny the truth given in the Bible; and you aren't talking about chicken eggs and chickens--only eggs in general and chickens in particular.

But__if you are talking about chicken eggs and chickens, then the answer from the believer's side makes this a simple answer: The chicken. See Genesis, Chapter 1.

user profile pic

amy-lepore | High School Teacher | (Level 1) Educator Emeritus

Posted November 29, 2008 at 11:59 AM (Answer #4)

dislike 0 like

All animals were created first.  Procreation helped them stay alive and evolve to adjust to different climates, predators, etc.

user profile pic

frizzyperm | College Teacher | Valedictorian

Posted December 1, 2008 at 2:20 AM (Answer #5)

dislike 0 like

??? @3 and 4. This question is in 'science' group, not theology. 'The Truth In The Bible' is a pre-science myth handed down by word of mouth for thousands of years like a massive game of Chinese whispers. It was created at a time when people thought you could collect all the animals of the world and put them on one small wooden boat; a time when 4000 years seeemed long enough for everything. When the world was flat because if it was round, you'd fall off. When twenty miles was a long way. When the universe was a tiny little thing.

It was written before knowledge of even simple subjects, let alone... *deep breath*... molecular theory, DNA, plate tectonics, cellular biology, engineering, oceanography, climatology, archaeology, history, bio-chemistry, radio-carbon dating, geology, electron microscopy, mathematics and computing, satellite technology and advanced instrumentation,  geo-physics, astro-physics, particle physics, quantum physics, physical geography, anthropology, ecology,

A time when a rough-hewn, solid, wooden axle represented the absolute radical, cutting edge of technology. People who couldn't even make glass or matches or steel or even glazed pottery. Stone age people! One step up from cavemen!!!

So probably, just probably, their attempted scientific theories are not much use as an answer to a question in a twenty-first century science group.

user profile pic

frizzyperm | College Teacher | Valedictorian

Posted December 1, 2008 at 6:27 AM (Answer #6)

dislike 0 like

If you want to tell young people that God made Adam from clay 4,000 years ago, may I suggest you do so in a forum dedicated to bible studies, where things like magic and fantasy are permissable.  

This is a science thread.

Genesis is not a scientific text. It was conceived millenia before science was invented during an age when scientific knowledge was basically non-existent (ie The Stone Age).

Therefore the bible is meaningless to modern science and irrelevant to this thread. Genesis, Chapter One has as much relevance to science as Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Chapter One, i.e. none.

user profile pic

dtv | Student | eNoter

Posted December 1, 2008 at 1:18 PM (Answer #7)

dislike 0 like

Even if the egg referred to in post #1 was a chicken egg, than the egg had to have come first.  The animal that laid the egg was the evolutionary ancestor of the chicken.  Of course, if it was meant that the egg was laid by a chicken, then the chicken came first. 

-DTV

Please visit my blog at www.dtvons.blogspot.com.  

user profile pic

mthibodeau | High School Teacher | (Level 1) Adjunct Educator

Posted December 7, 2008 at 9:12 PM (Answer #8)

dislike 0 like

#5 said: 'The Truth In The Bible' is a pre-science myth handed down by word of mouth for thousands of years like a massive game of Chinese whispers. It was created at a time when people thought you could collect all the animals of the world and put them on one small wooden boat

They didn't think you could collect all the animals of the world, just two of each. 

The egg came first.   

user profile pic

frizzyperm | College Teacher | Valedictorian

Posted December 8, 2008 at 3:16 AM (Answer #9)

dislike 0 like

@8 oh... ONLY two of each land-based species and fresh water fish and plant in existence in the world today. Including insects viruses, bacteria, trees, migrating birds, underground creatures, several million different types of beetles, species we don't know yet, etc. etc.

Noah, a stone age farmer from the middle east, collected two of every species that lives in Antarctica, Siberia, Austrailia, every tiny unknown island in the pacific and all the other places from across the world.

Piece of cake. ;-)

user profile pic

crow-boy | eNotes Newbie

Posted December 11, 2008 at 12:40 PM (Answer #10)

dislike 0 like

The egg, by far.

Think about evolution.  Lizards, amphibians, birds...there are millions of years before whatever strain evolved into the chicken where eggs existed.  In fact, whatever evolved into the chicken was probably born out of an egg.  It was probably some sort of small reptile.  Many tiny creatures are born out of eggs.  Eggs probably gave birth to the first sentient creature, and if you are talking theoretically, there probably is no definite answer.

user profile pic

harrington100 | Student, Grade 11 | eNotes Newbie

Posted December 11, 2008 at 5:30 PM (Answer #11)

dislike 0 like

animals came first from gods creation because with ought the chicken their would be no eggs

user profile pic

borntoteach | Middle School Teacher | eNotes Newbie

Posted December 14, 2008 at 10:31 AM (Answer #12)

dislike 0 like

This question caught my eye, but more importantly so did the replies. I think that a lot of you may be taking this too literally. When people ask, "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?" they aren't actually referring to a chicken or an egg. It's more theoretical. The question warrants an answer of any creature on Earth. Did the organism just appear (creationism) or is the organism a descendent of some creature that lived millions of years ago. Most of you have the right idea, but are missing the concept. As far post #10, discrediting or discouraging theological posts, I disagree. While I am not a believer in creationism, I give credit where credit is due. If it weren't for religious groups making decrees as to where we came from, then on what basis could science prove itself? I mean, most people know that Darwin's theory of evolution was laughed at and completely disagreed with when he first published his writings. It wasn't until after his death, did the scientific community start to accept and improve on his theory. Where would we be today without some theological discussion? Darwin's finches weren't passengers on the Ark...because we proved it wrong!

user profile pic

frizzyperm | College Teacher | Valedictorian

Posted December 17, 2008 at 10:02 AM (Answer #13)

dislike 0 like

@12 the original question was a popular paradox, used in basic philosophy, and most people know it as such. It's a fun head-spinner... To make an egg you need a bird but to make a bird you need an egg. How did the first egg or bird ever come into being given such an interdependency? It seems impossible. But it can't be impossible because we have eggs and birds all around us. A pleasing thought experiment for distracting bored children.

So I find it amusing and interesting that the reality (and the answer) is very unexpected, viz the first egg had absolutely nothing to do with the first bird and, thus, the paradox is rationalised and easily solved. Eggs, as we all knew but failed to apply, are not exclusive to birds, that was our error. This solution is an elegant demonstration of how knowledge and science can easily solve what to the unskilled appears impossible.

user profile pic

Noelle Thompson | High School Teacher | eNotes Employee

Posted May 7, 2009 at 12:37 PM (Answer #14)

dislike 0 like

I am going to echo post #13 and mention this enigma as a very popular unanswerable question.  I remember even Sesame Street spouting a song with that familiar title in the 1970's, . . . I suppose to get kids thinking critically a bit.  Anyway, the question creates a nice circle:  if you say the chicken came first, then the chicken must have hatched from an egg, but if you say the egg came first, then the egg must have been laid by the chicken.   I REALLY enjoyed reading all of the possible "answers," but I'll stick with the Sesame Street song.

Noelle Thompson

user profile pic

jkirkwoo | (Level 1) Adjunct Educator

Posted December 5, 2009 at 6:00 PM (Answer #15)

dislike 0 like

??? @3 and 4. This question is in 'science' group, not theology. 'The Truth In The Bible' is a pre-science myth handed down by word of mouth for thousands of years like a massive game of Chinese whispers. It was created at a time when people thought you could collect all the animals of the world and put them on one small wooden boat; a time when 4000 years seeemed long enough for everything. When the world was flat because if it was round, you'd fall off. When twenty miles was a long way. When the universe was a tiny little thing.

It was written before knowledge of even simple subjects, let alone... *deep breath*... molecular theory, DNA, plate tectonics, cellular biology, engineering, oceanography, climatology, archaeology, history, bio-chemistry, radio-carbon dating, geology, electron microscopy, mathematics and computing, satellite technology and advanced instrumentation,  geo-physics, astro-physics, particle physics, quantum physics, physical geography, anthropology, ecology,

A time when a rough-hewn, solid, wooden axle represented the absolute radical, cutting edge of technology. People who couldn't even make glass or matches or steel or even glazed pottery. Stone age people! One step up from cavemen!!!

So probably, just probably, their attempted scientific theories are not much use as an answer to a question in a twenty-first century science group.

  If you can look at the subjects of molecular theory, DNA, plate tectonics, cellular biology, engineering, oceanography, climatology, archaeology, history, bio-chemistry, geology, electron microscopy, mathematics, computing, satellite technology, geo-physics, astro-physics, etc, etc as you mentioned and not see God in all of these infinite subjects than you would have to be a caveman.

It takes one man's whole lifetime to become an expert in just one of these subjects.  How did these subjects come about with all their own individual knowledge and rules etc except through a mind-blowing awesome Creator.

You can not separate science and God because God created the science in all those subjects you have aforementioned.

user profile pic

enotechris | College Teacher | (Level 2) Senior Educator

Posted December 6, 2009 at 5:32 AM (Answer #16)

dislike 0 like

...so molecular theory, DNA, plate tectonics, cellular biology, engineering, oceanography, climatology, archaeology, history, bio-chemistry, geology, electron microscopy, mathematics, computing, satellite technology, geo-physics, astro-physics, etc, etc had to wait until our time before we could appreciate those workings of the Almighty?

If God created science, like he created all things, why didn't he deign to show it all to all mankind back in Adam's day?  Because of the mysterious ways of the Lord?

There is structure and beauty to the Universe, undeniably so.  As we evolve, we move from mysticsm to analysis.  As we can explain all creation's workings in terms of Physics and not Theology, the more intricate and amazing it appears.  The more we know ourselves, the less we attribute to God.  The concept of God simplifies explanations.  However, as we grow, we realize that explanations, to be complete, are never simple.  "They shall become like gods, knowing good and evil....."  "All knowing" may be a property of the Divine; striving to know is the property of Humankind.  Since finite minds must grapple with an infinite amount to know, there are some who will always label "that-which-we-do-not-know-yet" as the province of God.

user profile pic

peegilleen | Student, College Freshman | eNotes Newbie

Posted May 3, 2012 at 11:20 AM (Answer #18)

dislike 0 like

Haha! This is brilliant! Somebody asked the innocent question of "which came first the chicken or the egg?", and all you idiots start arguing about whether or not God exists!? 

Thanks for such a funny thread :D

God Bless you all!

user profile pic

loraaa | Student | Valedictorian

Posted May 3, 2012 at 11:42 AM (Answer #19)

dislike 0 like

Children have the answer to your question!!! (^_*)

Join to answer this question

Join a community of thousands of dedicated teachers and students.

Join eNotes